Thank you for visiting our forum. As a guest, you have limited access to view some discussion and articles. By joining our free community, you will be able to view all discussions and articles, post your own topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos, participate in Pick'Em contests and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today!!

The one and done means the best players can continue to go to Kentucky,UNC,Duke,Louisville and other powerhouses without having the possibility of sitting on the bench. The best players from Kentucky leave after one year and the best just sign on for the next and the cycle begins again. If players had to wait until after their junior years, players would be more likely to go to other schools for early playing time. If they don't have to wait then the national powerhouses just reload year after year and other schools just have to go after leftovers. Not good for us....

Most college basketball fans follow one of those teams though, so most people are good with the current situation. I agree it would be more fun if top talent would spread out a bit, but there are always teams of no name upperclassmen ranked in the top ten. Wisconsin has been good for a while with not many burger boys. South Carolina isn't able to outrecruit UK or Florida, so we need to build a program off of a scheme and a coach. We are screwed if Frank Martin's vision is not realized in 2 years.

Well I am NOT a fan of the NBA, and I don't care to watch those games. I love College basketball games instead. I do agree that if a player is recruited by a school, the basketball student athlete should stay for three years like football players do. The NBA game is not good to watch anymore for me. You are right its watered down!

This will never happen again, basketball is a totally different game than football. Bodies develop at younger ages now for basketball compared to football. As gifted as JDVC was in high school, NFL teams would not have taken him. Football bodies need that time to develop. Basketball is totally different physically. A player can get away with being on the skinny side if he can run, jump out of the gym and stroke the net. I think doing away with the one and done and letting kids go straight to the NBA again would help us. All of these Kentucky and UNC and Duke players wouldn't go to college, the majority would just toss their name in the NBA and their would be more of a pool to choose from player and talent wise for those players who wouldn't go to the NBA and those players in a bigger pool would be closer in talent with all the leftover talent and help us get some players who would be just as good as players who go to Kentucky, UNC, Duke and Kansas.

The 1 year rule is the DUMBEST rule in sports. 99% of basketball players could care less about any kind of academics. Making them go to school is pointless, but only require 1 year is a complete waste of everyones time. They don't accomplish anything academically. Why not split it down the middle between 1 and 3 and require 2. Require them to take money management classes as part of their course load so that they don't spend every dime of their rookie contract the first year and understand what's required of them financially after they leave school.

The NCAA has a responsibility to student athletes in helping set them up for a successful future. Only requiring them to go one year does nothing at all for any of those kids.

I understand about basketball and football being different but setting young athletes up for failure after athletics does nobody any good.

They need to go back to letting them turn pro out of high school. If they go to college they need to stay for at least 3 years.

This is perfect.

I'm still a big believer that scheme and coach can and will continue to be a big factor as well (i.e. Butler, VCU, etc...) but overall, the powerhouse schools will continue to dominate because most of those top recruits could give a shit about a college edumacation.

Karma bites them in the ass, though, when most of them turn out to be flops after their one year in college anyway.

Those top kids that go to UNC & Duke typically stay a few years, don't they?

i disagree that its means theres no competitive balance. if you want to argue about a mediocre product thats one thing, but louisville won the title without a bunch of one and dones vs a michigan team that didnt have a bunch of one and dones and we saw butler go to back to back title games recently.

it does allow the big schools to reload quicker, but the teams with 2 or more frosh lottery picks are beatable.

This will never happen again, basketball is a totally different game than football. Bodies develop at younger ages now for basketball compared to football. As gifted as JDVC was in high school, NFL teams would not have taken him. Football bodies need that time to develop. Basketball is totally different physically. A player can get away with being on the skinny side if he can run, jump out of the gym and stroke the net. I think doing away with the one and done and letting kids go straight to the NBA again would help us. All of these Kentucky and UNC and Duke players wouldn't go to college, the majority would just toss their name in the NBA and their would be more of a pool to choose from player and talent wise for those players who wouldn't go to the NBA and those players in a bigger pool would be closer in talent with all the leftover talent and help us get some players who would be just as good as players who go to Kentucky, UNC, Duke and Kansas.

I'm sorry but kids who are 18-19 entering the NBA cannot bang with the bigger players. Think of low post players going up against someone like Dwight Howard or Zach Randolph. I think it is just as important for them to develop. It should be a minimum of two years to stay in college basketball.

There is no "One and Done" Rule. The NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement simply states that players must be at least 19 years old and one year removed from graduating high school to be draft eligible. Players do not have to go to college. They can take a year off or play basketball overseas to make money. Brandon Jennings did the latter. Players who go to college are simply doing so for the experience, coaching/training and additional exposure.

Without the "rule" college basketball would not benefit. The NCAA has no file footage of Kobe Bryant or LeBron James because both players went straight to the pros after high school. From a business standpoint, the NCAA could have made a ton of money off them. Without the rule, the freshman classes wouldn't be as star studded and storylines wouldn't be as interesting. This season for example is only great because of the amount of great freshmen playing.

There is no "One and Done" Rule. The NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement simply states that players must be at least 19 years old and one year removed from graduating high school to be draft eligible. Players do not have to go to college. They can take a year off or play basketball overseas to make money. Brandon Jennings did the latter. Players who go to college are simply doing so for the experience, coaching/training and additional exposure.

Without the "rule" college basketball would not benefit. The NCAA has no file footage of Kobe Bryant or LeBron James because both players went straight to the pros after high school. From a business standpoint, the NCAA could have made a ton of money off them. Without the rule, the freshman classes wouldn't be as star studded and storylines wouldn't be as interesting. This season for example is only great because of the amount of great freshmen playing.

I'm surprised the NBA hasn't tried to promote the D-League as a viable option in place of college and overseas. The kid would be making money (advantage over college) and getting experience playing in NBA-style games (advantage over international competition).

I'm surprised the NBA hasn't tried to promote the D-League as a viable option in place of college and overseas. The kid would be making money (advantage over college) and getting experience playing in NBA-style games (advantage over international competition).

The NBA just does a bad job in general with the D-League. It's seen as a demotion rather than an enhancement. If you're a star freshman recruit, I could see why you wouldn't want to go to the D-League, and why college would be more preferrable.

At college you get to live one last year as a kid, have fun, go to parties, be a BMOC, etc. Then you get the opportunity to compete for an NCAA Championship which is better than competing for a D-League Championship lol.

Either way there's a lot of confusion about the rule. Nobody is forced to go to college, but in comparison it's the best option. Taking a year off leads to more questions about someone's game since they haven't played against great competition since graduating high school.